Case 2302993/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Jachowski v The Lady Eleanor Holles School — 2025
- Case reference
- 2302993/2024
- Decision date
- 19 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Jachowski
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant applied on 19 December 2025 for reconsideration of a judgment sent to the parties on 12 December 2025. The Tribunal refused the application because it found there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked.
The Tribunal recorded that the claimant referred to earlier preliminary hearing matters and correspondence, but stated that those references were not understood as applications to reconsider those hearing outcomes. It also stated that the claimant had not specified the legal basis for a claim of loss of accommodation, and that because an amendment application had been refused, loss of accommodation was not an issue before the Tribunal.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment refuses the claimant's application for reconsideration and does not determine the substantive disability discrimination claim. | Other | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment refuses the claimant's application for reconsideration and does not determine the substantive unfair dismissal claim. | Other | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.